Google's mobile-friendly update. How significant is the impact for us?
-
Hi guys.
Recently I got an email from Webmaster-tools saying our site is poorly optimised for mobile devices, and that it’s going to heavily affect rankings from April 21st. I’m worried to say the least. We literary cannot afford a hit on traffic at the moment
We rank well for niche terms like ‘customised diary’ and ‘personalised diary’.
So question...
Because we rank well for these very specific searches will we still take a hit on rankings after the update? Won’t our high relevancy for those search terms be enough to keep us high in the results?
Also, do you know if this change is specific to the users device? E.g) Someone on a mobile device will get mobile-friendly results, whilst users on a laptop will get different results altogether?
I'm just trying to get a sense of how much this update will effect us. Any isights, suggestion, or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Our site.
Thanks in advance. This community is invaluable to us
Isaac - TOAD Diaries.
-
Hi Dirk. Thank you so much again for your response.
Yes we must get your whole site sorted for our mobile users. But like you say focusing on the landing pages are essential Better get cracking!
Thanks again
Isaac.
-
Hi
according to this article http://searchengineland.com/google-mobile-friendly-ranking-factor-runs-real-time-page-page-basis-216100 Google has confirmed that it based on page rather than site level.
From user experience perspective it would be better to have the full site responsive, given the urgency it would focus on landing page.. Your designer tool pages seem not that important in terms of search - you could eventually put them on noindex if you don't want Google to see them, although I don't think this absolutely necessary.
Dirk
-
Hi Dirk. Thank you so much for you're response! Greatly appreciated!
On what you said....
"It also seems that it's defined on page - not site level, so you could try to provide mobile versions for your most important landing pages (dedicated or responsive)."
Is this to say that if our home page (and other landing pages) were mobile-friendly we may not see any change in (mobile) rankings? Even if these pages link to poorly optimised pages?
On our site our designer tool is where you buy our product. This is a very difficult page to make mobile friendly. So won't google just see that the majority of links are going to this page and penalise accordingly?
Thanks.
Isaac.
-
Google has stated that it's going to impact a large significant amount of results but it's definitely going to be for mobile only so you should check your traffic sources to see if you get a good chunk of mobile traffic.
Dirk is right so you should look at your pages that have good mobile traffic and push out a temporary solution for that until you get a good mobile end for your website.
Good luck!
-
"most discussions seem to agree that the impact will only be for mobile searches"
I agree this is Google's intent. I don't think it'll necessarily be the actual result. If you lose a lot of traffic or your bounce rates go up or your SERP bounce-back rates go up, etc. it could affect desktop search.
I think this update has the potential to affect desktop but as you said, difficult to predict. Great answer & very helpful.
-
There is a similar thread here: http://moz.com/community/q/what-if-my-site-isn-t-ready-for-mobile-armageddon-by-april-21st
If you have a lot of mobile visitors coming in via Google, I think you may expect that this traffic will disappear (unless your competitors aren't very mobile friendly as well).
Nobody really knows what the impact is going to be, most discussions seem to agree that the impact will only be for mobile searches, but again, it's difficult to predict.
It also seems that it's defined on page - not site level, so you could try to provide mobile versions for your most important landing pages (dedicated or responsive). Your lay-out seems pretty straight forward, so I guess it shouldn't be too difficult to adapt it Remember that it doesn't have to perfect - it just needs to pass the "mobile friendly" test - https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/mobile-friendly/ - you can always improve later on.
Hope this helps
Dirk
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Updated page not ranking.
Hi Guys. Bit flummoxed by this. I've recently updated our Mid year diaries page to be this years mid year products. i.e) Diaries that go from 2015-16 not 2014-15. Last year we rank really well for the search term 'mid year diaries 14-15'. All i've done is update the page to be focused on 2015-16 diaries, but when i type in 'mid year diaries 15-16' it's no where to be seen in the SERP. Even our home page is ranking higher! I'm really puzzled about this, nothings changed apart from the year! The only reason I can think of is that Google is reading the file name of the images which are related to lasts years products? For example the file name might say mid year diary 2014-15. Do you think this is what's effecting us? Very puzzling 😕 I've submitted it through Webmaster tool btw 🙂 Isaac.
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
Google news rejection
Google News is always rejecting my application. I feel as if my site strongly fits the requirements yet they reject it all the time. My url is hiddentriforce.com Any thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | | Atomicx0 -
Why do I have 2 different URL's for the same page - is this good practice?
Hi GuysMy father is currently using a programmer to build his new site. Knowing a little about SEO etc, I was a little suspicious of the work carried out. **Anyone with good programming and SEO knowledge, please offer your advice!**This page http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/gallery-range-wood-flooring/ which is soon to be http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/ you'll see has a number of different products. The products on this particular page have been built into colour categories like thishttp://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/lights-greys http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/beiges http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/browns http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/darks-blacks This is fine. Eventually when we add to our selection of woods, we'll easily segment each product into "colour categories" for users to easily navigate to. My question is - Why do I have 2 different URL's for the same page - is this good practice? Please see below... Visible URL - http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/browns/cipressa/Below is the permalink seen in Word Press for this page also.Permalink: http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/browns-engineered-wood/cipressa/and in the Word Press snippet shows the same permalink urlCipressa | Engineered Brown Wood | The Wood Gallerieswww.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/browns-engineered-wood/cipressa/ Buy Cipressa Engineered Brown Wood, available at The Wood Galleries, London. Provides an Exceptional Foundation for Elegant Décor, Extravagant .. If this is completely ok and has no negative search impact - then I'm happy. If not what should I advise to my programmer to do? Your help would be very much appreciated. Regards Faye
On-Page Optimization | | Faye2340 -
How the hell do you get microformat to show up on google serp?
Preface: I implemented Microformat aggregate review (http://data-vocabulary.org/Review-aggregate) for our e-commerce website and included only on the homepage. The vote and count are actually coming from real reviews we are getting from our customers, and in the homepage some reviews are shown prominently and a link points to the full list of all the reviews. Microformat markup is correct, validated in GWT. Have been online for a while (probably a couple of years). Our website: http://www.gomme-auto.it The star rating never showed up. When checking competitors I could see their microformats where not showing up either. But now things changed, if I check one competitor (the market leader www.gommadiretto.it) searching for it with their brand name “gommadiretto” no star rating is showing, but if I search for tires of a specific manufactured like “pneumatici barum” I can see their result in serp is showing the star rating for that specific internal page (the brand page) where they simply put the website overall aggregate review microformat mark up, they actually put it on every page. And that make me scratch my head and start asking myself some questions: is google showing their microformats because they manually awarded them somehow? no other competitor seems to have got the star rating in serp is google showing their microformats because they have so much more reviews than I have? I have around 1700, they have around 11000. is google showing their microformats because their reviews are certified by TrustPilot? is google showing their microformats because they put it in the product page? well of course since I am not putting it there (in the brand page) it's a factor, but isn't it recommended to put the website aggregate reviews microformat only on one page? and shouldn't we show the brand reviews on the brand page? isn't it best practice/recommended to put the website aggregate review microformat only on one page? is google showing their microformats because of some other reasons I can't see? What the hell is google criteria for showing the star rating? Does anyone know?
On-Page Optimization | | max.favilli0 -
Google Search - One page having problems
this issue is concerning my site - cruvoir.com we retail designer clothing online, and currently have 17 'designer' pages - one for each manufacturer brand name. We target these brand names for our campaign and track the progress with Moz and try to focus them in Google search. Of many of the designer names, we rank pretty well in Google search (usually under #15 when searching for the specific brand. All brands are doing well, except one brand : "Lost And Found" - a designer label we carry. This is the page for this brand name : https://cruvoir.com/5-lost-and-found we cannot figure it out. It happens to be our most important label we carry. when we search for this brand name or include it in any other search terms, we never are in the google search results. I expect it is a crawl issue, but we have covered all our ground in optimizing this brand page. It seems this page is also indexed with Google. But we cannot figure out why it does not rank us in search.
On-Page Optimization | | cruvoir0 -
Using phrases like 'NO 1' or 'Best' int he title tag
Hi All, Quick question - is it illegal, against any rule etc to use phrases such as 'The No 1 rest of the title tag | Brand Name' on a site?
On-Page Optimization | | Webrevolve0 -
International Website(s)
I have an e-commerce site currently selling in Canada and am now looking to branch it into the USA. We have both the .ca and .us domain names, but I am not sure what the best approach to this would be. If we put up a website on the .us domain name it would be virtually the same.. So I would assume we would have a duplicate content issue. What would be the best way to approach this type of situation?
On-Page Optimization | | wishmedia0 -
What's the best practice for implementing a "content disclaimer" that doesn't block search robots?
Our client needs a content disclaimer on their site. This is a simple "If you agree to these rules then click YES if not click NO" and you're pushed back to the home page. I have this gut feeling that this may cause an upset with the search robots. Any advice? R/ John
On-Page Optimization | | TheNorthernOffice790